CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance

ITO, WARD- 2(3)(4), HAPUR, HAPUR vs. SHIVA AND SHIVA, HAPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal as well as Assessee’s cross objection stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahayito, Ward 2(3)(4), Vs. Shiva & Shiva Hapur Near Sri Ram Mandir, 3-A, Surya Vihar, L.N. School Marg, Near Ambedkar Chowk, Garh Road, Hapur, Up Hapur (Pan: Adxfs1969A) (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 101/Del/2025 (Ita No. 1945/Del/2025) (Ay 2020-21) Shiva & Shiva Vs. Ito, Ward 2(3)(4), Near Sri Ram Mandir, Hapur, Up L.N. School Marg, Garh Road, Hapur (Pan: Adxfs1969A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr. Assessee By : Sh. Ayaan Singh, Adv.

…he decision in the case of CIT vs. Metachem Industries (2000) 245 ITR 160 (MP) wherein, it has been held that once the partner owns and explains the source, no addition can be made in the firm’s hands. Also, in the case of CIT vs. Jaiswal Motor Finance (1983) 141 ITR 706 (All.) wherein, it was held that if partners are identifiable and confirm investment, firm cannot be taxed. It is noted that in the instant case each partner personally confirmed the contribution and furnished supporting evidence. Therefore, the addition in the firm’s hands is against the spirit of the well settled law. We note that AO has conduc…

MALLYA REAL ESTATES P.LTD,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-16(2), NEW DELHI

…ot commenced its business and where no business has commenced, addition u/s 68 cannot be made. For this proposition, he relied on the following decisions:\n(i) CIT Vs. Bharat Engineering and Construction Com 83 ITR 187 [SC]\n(ii) CIT Vs. Jaiswal Motor Finance 141 ITR 706 [Ahd]\n(iii) DCIT Vs. Esteem Towers Pvt Ltd 99 TTJ 472 [Del]\n(iv) Mitesh Rolling Mills Vs. CIT 258 ITR 278.\n\n8. On the other hand, the ld. DR submitted that the balance sheet shows liability of Rs 1,40,10,000/- against the name of M/s Sushil Enterprises and Rs.38,19,700/- against the name of M/s Bishan Sons totaling to Rs 1,78,39,700/- under t…

ITO,WARD-24(1), NEW DELHI vs. SUN INTRASTATE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

…the source, he should have considered the same in the hands of the partners only and not in the case of the firm. This view of ours is supported by the decisions of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases reported in CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ITR 706 and Surendra Mahan Seth v. CIT *1996 + 221 ITR 239.” ITA Nos. 1469 & 1470/Del/2023 14 Sun Intrastate Pvt. Ltd. Where the nature and source of a receipt, whether it be of money or other property, cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open for the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee and no further burden lies…

ITO,WARD-24(1), NEW DELHI vs. SUN INTRASTATE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

…the source, he should have considered the same in the hands of the partners only and not in the case of the firm. This view of ours is supported by the decisions of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the cases reported in CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ITR 706 and Surendra Mahan Seth v. CIT *1996 + 221 ITR 239.” ITA Nos. 1469 & 1470/Del/2023 14 Sun Intrastate Pvt. Ltd. Where the nature and source of a receipt, whether it be of money or other property, cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open for the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee and no further burden lies…

GAZAL CATERERS,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 22(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Naveen Chandra

…tax Officer, 134 taxmann.com 188 dated 03.01.2022 (Gujarat High Court) (ii) ITO vs. M/s. Nithyasudha Combines I.T.A. Nos.576 & 577/Chny/2020 dated 06.05.2022 (ITAT, Chennai Bench) (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad Vs. Jaiswal Motor Finance, (1983), 141 ITR 706 (Allahabad High Court) (iv) Abhyudaya Pharmaceuticals vs. CIT, 350 ITR 358 (Allahabad High Court) (v) Zafa Ahmed & Company vs. CIT, 93 DTR 29 (Allahabad High Court) (vi) ITO Vs. Dhiman Systems, 100 TTJ 466 (ITAT, Amritsar Bench) 21. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the case of the assessee firm is directly covered by above judic…

CLAVECON INDIA P.LTD,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

…he relevant findings read as under: “22. .Having considered the arguments so advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we find, in the case of Abhyudaya Pharmaceuticals (supra), this Court considered the decision in the case of CIT v. Jaish Finance[1983] 141 ITR 706(All.) as also the Kapur Brothers. (supra) and thereafter concluded authorities below had committed an error as they failed to take into account the fact that it being the firs- of business, no addition could have been made to the undisclosed income of the assessee, that partnership firm. 23. Similarly, in the case of India Rice Mills (supra) als…

CLAVECON INDIA P.LTD,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

…he relevant findings read as under: “22. .Having considered the arguments so advanced by learned counsel for the parties, we find, in the case of Abhyudaya Pharmaceuticals (supra), this Court considered the decision in the case of CIT v. Jaish Finance[1983] 141 ITR 706(All.) as also the Kapur Brothers. (supra) and thereafter concluded authorities below had committed an error as they failed to take into account the fact that it being the firs- of business, no addition could have been made to the undisclosed income of the assessee, that partnership firm. 23. Similarly, in the case of India Rice Mills (supra) als…